Monday, October 18, 2010

MMBSD: Hands in the Air

So after 6 weeks every NFC team has at least 2 losses. Meaning if you know who is going to win the NFC you need to wager substantially and not read this blog. Sure there are some bad teams (ahem Panthers) but otherwise on any given Sunday any NFC team seems capable of beating any other team. Hell even the Lions have scored more points than they've given up. I'm throwing up my hands in the air on predictions and just enjoying the ride. Check back in Week 10 to see if there's any more clarity.

On the other hand the AFC seems fairly clearly. Or at least who is in the picture. Ravens, Steelers, Patriots, and Jets seem to be the elite of the AFC. The Pats squeaked by the Ravens in OT at home. A nice win but hardly definitive. Fortunately or unfortunately all of these teams will play during the regular season so a good pecking order heading into the playoffs will be established.

College FootballIt's beginning to get that 2007 feel where everyone seems to lose on a non-stop basis. Oregon and OU have the pole positions but there lack of defense is well troubling. Nevada lost to Hawaii meaning Boise has double digit underdogs the rest of the way - hardly a way to ensure a top 2 spot. The conventional (and true wisdom) is that LSU and Auburn control their destiny as an undefeated SEC Champ get's an automatic bid to the mythical BCS championship. Of course they have to play each other (and Bama).

That said it's looking more and more likely like a non-BCS will get a spot in the mythical championship. Why? The voters. The voters have 3 non-BCS in the top 10 for the first time I can remember. The respect is there, the votes are there, all that needs to follow is a few more upsets.....

9 comments:

Except the computer ratings will keep the non-BCS teams out of the top spots. Boise St is the consensus #2 among pollsters, but #3 in the BCS standings...because of computers.

As you note, Nevada's loss will make things very tricky for BSU. The Broncos have to hope that they go undefeated and that every power conference team has at least one loss. But even then, it's not hard to foresee BSU stuck at #3.

I'll distill the AFC down even further to just the Steelers and Jets. There isn't a single team in the NFL that has the depth on offense AND defense that the Jets do and I think the Steelers are the only team that can match up with them at this point. The Patriots D is horrendous and the Ravens can't run the ball.

"Boise St is the consensus #2 among pollsters, but #3 in the BCS standings...because of computers."

Which makes a lot of sense. If the traditional complaint from places like Boise is that voters don't respect non-BCS conference schools then the fact that they're voted #2 by humans puts to rest any nonsensical notions of bias. Boise State is exactly where it belongs on the BCS list. They've played one team currently ranked in the BCS top-25 (VT) and beat them in Week 1 by one score. Other than that, they've played (and beaten) bad teams. It's hard to argue that BSU is being sold short here.

Another year, another set of Boise State debates (which, I'll note, I didn't start):

"It's hard to argue that BSU is being sold short here."

I'm not making that argument...yet. Let's see who remains undefeated come December. As of today, the season is too young, and there are too many traditionally powerful schools in powerful conferences with undefeated records and stronger schedules.

"The fact that they're voted #2 by humans puts to rest any nonsensical notions of bias."

"Nonsensical"? You can't seriously dispute that there has been a historical bias against non-BCS teams like BSU, or that the BCS team-selection formula - which gives an automatic berth to craptastic conference winners from the Big East and ACC but excludes high-performing non-BCS schools - still reflects a bias. That you think the bias is justified doesn't mean that claims of bias are "nonsensical". The bias is real. You just think it's defensible.

Beyond that, BSU in particular (and TCU to a lesser extent) has built up its brand to the point where voters can no longer reasonably exclude the Broncos from the highest poll spots. So yes, the human polls no longer reflect a bias - at least not for BSU and TCU.

Please. That's simply ridiculous. You really think that BSU and TCU are where they are only because they're overrated? Consider that the computers - which presumably don't reflect voter bias for or against a team - placed both schools outside the top 2 but in the final top 10 in each of the last two seasons. In other words, even the computers agreed that both teams were deserving of berths in BCS bowls.

Of course, both teams were denied a BCS bowl berth after the 2008 season. Did you enjoy the classic Orange Bowl between VaTech (#17 in the final computer rankings) and Cincinnati (#12)? Man, that was one for the ages.

There's a fair debate as to whether BSU is one of the top two teams in the nation. Nobody is seriosuly debating whether they're top 10. Nobody.

1) I'm joining the party late... but I will say that I can't deny Boise or TCU from their computer rankings inside the top 10. I have a hard time putting them in the top 3. Boise or TCU (or Utah who's still in the mix) would need a lot of other teams to lose to maintain a hold in the human polls (and the computers).

2) Pats and Ravens have weaknesses, true. But these are still much better teams than anyone else at this point. I still like the sneaky Dolphins too. Can't tell if the Colts/Texans are real at this point.

... and yes, obviously voters are fine with giving them high positions now. So I don't believe there is any bias against them. Just wait until the last week though... when they suddenly drop a few places!